- Today
- Holidays
- Birthdays
- Reminders
- Cities
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Baltimore
- Berwyn
- Beverly Hills
- Birmingham
- Boston
- Brooklyn
- Buffalo
- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Cincinnati
- Cleveland
- Columbus
- Dallas
- Denver
- Detroit
- Fort Worth
- Houston
- Indianapolis
- Knoxville
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles
- Louisville
- Madison
- Memphis
- Miami
- Milwaukee
- Minneapolis
- Nashville
- New Orleans
- New York
- Omaha
- Orlando
- Philadelphia
- Phoenix
- Pittsburgh
- Portland
- Raleigh
- Richmond
- Rutherford
- Sacramento
- Salt Lake City
- San Antonio
- San Diego
- San Francisco
- San Jose
- Seattle
- Tampa
- Tucson
- Washington
Waynesboro Today
By the People, for the People
Court Rules Whistleblower Suit Can Proceed Against Supervisor, Not City
City of Waynesboro entitled to sovereign immunity, but supervisor Michael D. Wilhelm is not protected
Apr. 7, 2026 at 1:00pm
Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›
The court's ruling exposes the complex legal landscape around whistleblower protections in the public sector.Waynesboro TodayThe Court of Appeals of Virginia ruled that a whistleblower suit can proceed against a supervisor but not the City of Waynesboro due to sovereign immunity. Former police captain Michael W. Martin brought claims against the city and his supervisor Wilhelm under the Fraud and Abuse Whistle Blower Protection Act, alleging wrongful termination and retaliation.
Why it matters
The decision highlights the complex legal landscape around whistleblower protections, with the court finding that the state's Whistle Blower Act waives sovereign immunity for individual supervisors but not for government agencies. This could have implications for future whistleblower cases against public employers in Virginia.
The details
The court ruled that while the City of Waynesboro was entitled to sovereign immunity from Martin's whistleblower claim, his supervisor Wilhelm was not protected. The court found that the Whistle Blower Act expressly creates a private right of action against individual supervisors, waiving their sovereign immunity. However, the act does not waive sovereign immunity for government agencies like the city. The court also affirmed the denial of summary judgment against Wilhelm on the whistleblower claim, finding that there were disputed facts about whether he terminated Martin in retaliation.
- Between 2016 and 2018, Martin worked on a drug task force and had several disagreements with other officials over enforcement methods.
- An internal investigation concluded that Martin had violated WPD policies, and he was terminated in 2018.
The players
Michael W. Martin
A former captain of the Waynesboro Police Department who brought the whistleblower and retaliation claims against the city and his supervisor.
Michael D. Wilhelm
Martin's supervisor at the Waynesboro Police Department, who was not protected by sovereign immunity in the whistleblower suit.
City of Waynesboro
The municipal employer that was entitled to sovereign immunity from Martin's whistleblower claim under the court's ruling.
What they’re saying
“The decision shows that in order to create a waiver of sovereign immunity, the statute doesn't have to use the magic words 'we hereby waive sovereign immunity,' and it just needs to be clear that the statute created a cause of action.”
— Barry Montgomery, Attorney for Michael W. Martin
What’s next
The case will now proceed to trial against the supervisor, Michael D. Wilhelm, on the whistleblower claim.
The takeaway
This ruling highlights the complex legal landscape around whistleblower protections, with government agencies potentially shielded by sovereign immunity while individual supervisors can be held liable. It underscores the importance of carefully crafting whistleblower statutes to ensure they effectively protect those who report misconduct.
